Program Testing and Persistent Properties

[Bob Warren]

Ray:

There was an implicit "hack" in the penultimate image of my article.

When the option is selected:
1. On selecting the Browse Tool (Run scripts and interact), save the
stack to the HD temporarily.
2. On selecting the Pointer Tool (edit), substitute the modified stack with
the temp stack.

Things are easy to say, but more difficult to do. Do you think that
something along these lines would be viable?

Bob

**************************************
> > There is one remaining question for those of you with experience in both
VB
> > and RunRev. Do you think it would be a good idea to make the "persisting
> > properties" OPTIONAL as suggested by the penultimate "dream" picture of
my
> > article at http://www.howsoft.com/runrev/article.htm  ?

> I think in order to do that we'd need to be able to know the difference
> between the two states - design vs. run time. And right now, that's not
> something one can easily figure out since Rev is really always at runtime.

> One thing we *could* do might be do separate stack vs. standalone - i.e.
> that when a stack is turned into a standalone, certain properties, text,
> etc. is removed. Or we might be able to create an object-level property
that
> is like cantModify, but on an object-specific level.

> However I think it would be a "hack" (if you'll excuse the word). Until
and
> unless Rev gets a true "design mode", any attempts at simulating a design
> vs. run environment would be a kludge at best, IMHO.

> I think it may be more important to focus on providing materials that will
> allow VB (and other) programmers to make the mental shift to the Rev
> paradigm.

> But that's just one man's opinion...

> Ken Ray
> Sons of Thunder Software
> Web site: http://www.sonsothunder.com/
> Email: kray at sonsothunder.com